Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background by Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta

SNP,

Thanks for presenting this essay, it was quite interesting. Although perhaps a bit off topic for this particular contest, I nevertheless appreciate approaches which attempt to examine questions from experimental perspectives.

You might be aware that others have also proposed that the CMBR could be a result of blackbody radiation from matter in the universe. That is, if you allow for some mechanism whereby light can experience redshift with distance irrespective of cosmic expansion (of which there have been some arguments) one could posit that such presents an alternative resolution, in the same manner as cosmic expansion. To show this you would need an experiment demonstrating that the redshift occurs regardless of whether cosmic expansion exists, and further that the magnitude of redshift is sufficient to the observed intensity.

Without a more detailed review, I'm not yet certain that your particular experiment could suitably differentiate between possible redshift mechanisms and/or anisotropy mechanisms. Such a theory suggests that measured WMAP anisotropies result from non-inflationary effects, including redshift effects unrelated to cosmic expansion, of which have not yet been demonstrated as matching the measured data, at least at present, as far as I'm currently aware.

Also, it appears that from your essay you are considering the ISM/IGM to be the major sources of aliasing when it comes to uniformity in the CMB as measured from Earth; you state that, in your estimation, large anisotropies would be measurable outside of galaxies which suggests yet another resolution mechanism.

The suggestion of a non-expanding universe often suggests one with infinite age and thus suggests additional considerations for resolving Olber's paradox; I did not encounter these items in your essay.

Another issue that I didn't come across in your essay is with respect to the conversion of matter to radiation in stellar sources, in that the radiation of the universe would continue to increase until thermal equilibrium were reached by cosmic plasma. Based on the CMB measurements and your essay, the expectation then would be that the universe is far from reaching equilibrium, and may in fact never reach that state (which may be reasonable). Perhaps you have addressed this in your other papers referenced, but it doesn't appear to be covered here.

Thanks again for presenting this. Remember that experiment, not consensus, is the bedrock of the scientific method; you don't need to be mainstream to be correct, but you do need the experimental evidence.

Chris

SNP,

Regarding blue-shifted galaxies... Though I will check your links, the data I am familiar with suggests that nearly all galaxies are red-shifted, with the exception of very few. In essence, out of the many billions and billions of galaxies surveyed, there are less than 10,000 that have been found blue-shifted and the explanations for those blue-shifts are quite mundane, most notably that the vast majority of these are nearby and would be expected to demonstrate velocity dispersions which would readily account for the blue-shift. The trivial percentage is obviously nowhere near what we would expect from a random distribution if we were to ignore redshift; as such, I don't think you can make that particular case with the current data. To duplicate the CMB character without expansion, I think you're going to need an alternative red-shift explanation, as I noted earlier.

Chris

P.S. I checked the links on your site; one works, one doesn't. However, you present data suggesting ~7000 blue-shifted galaxies out of ~558,000 in the survey which is less than 1.3% with blue-shift and those mostly appear in quite nearby regions (so that is even a high bias). The only way you can get the 31% (or thereabouts) you've quoted is if all quasars were somehow considered blue-shifted galaxies, but no quasar has yet been shown as blue-shifted (at least as far as I'm aware) in terms of its systemic body (that is, the low ionization lines when not including outflow jets as isolated components). Given that, I'm not sure how you can reconcile the data. You would need to prove that all quasars are actually blue-shifted, meaning that every quasar analysis to date has been in error; you would need some very concrete evidence which could incontrovertibly refute all the existing analysis in order to do that.

Dear Guptaji,

I would like to rate your fine essay with a very high score and I want to know whether you have rated mine. So, please, reply to my above e-mail.

All the best in the essay contest.

Sreenath

Dear Guptaji,

Thank you very much for rating my essay. I have rated your essay with full honors, that is, 10/10 so that your average rating is 3.5 with 34 ratings although I know that you have rated me with 8 score. You need some more rating like this to move up on the list. My e-mail address is, bnsreenath@yahoo.co.in. please give me your e-mail ID also.

All the best in the essay contest.

Sreenath

snp,

Your essay is out of my knowledge area, but I do comprehend that you are having a disagreement on what the CMB is showing. I can't give you any good feedback due to the limitations of my knowledge at the moment, but as it is an area in which I will need to beef up on in the future, I look forward to being able to come back to your essay to read a different argument.

Thanks

Jeff Baugher

Dear author. Hello, and apologies if this does not apply to you. I have read and rated your essay and about 50 others. If you have not read, or did not rate my essay The Cloud of Unknowing please consider doing so. With best wishes.

Vladimir

Dear Satyavarapu

Diffraction spreads the wavefront and makes sharp focusing impossible. Whether it applies to your calculations or not depends on whether you are interested in local intensity (which varies according to whether the wave is tightly focused or not) or simple the total amount of energy which does not change because of the law of conservation of energy.

Good luck!

Vladimir

Dear Sri Gupta

Of course I know of your kind reading of my essay - I meant about rating it or not, as the case my be.

With all best wishes

Vladimir

Dear All,

It is with utmost joy and love that I give you all the cosmological iSeries which spans the entire numerical spectrum from -infinity through 0 to +infinity and the simple principle underlying it is sum of any two consecutive numbers is the next number in the series. 0 is the base seed and i can be any seed between 0 and infinity.

iSeries always yields two sub semi series, each of which has 0 as a base seed and 2i as the first seed.

One of the sub series is always defined by the equation

Sn = 2 * Sn-1 + Sigma (i=2 to n) Sn-i

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2 * i

the second sub series is always defined by the equation

Sn = 3 * Sn-1 -Sn-2

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2 * i

Division of consecutive numbers in each of these subseries always eventually converges on 2.168 which is the Square of 1.618.

Union of these series always yields another series which is just a new iSeries of a 2i first seed and can be defined by the universal equation

Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2*i

Division of consecutive numbers in the merged series always eventually converges on 1.618 which happens to be the golden ratio "Phi".

Fibonacci series is just a subset of the iSeries where the first seed or S1 =1.

Examples

starting iSeries governed by Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2

where i = 0.5, S0 = 0 and S1 = 0.5

-27.5 17 -10.5 6.5 -4 2.5 -1.5 1 -.5 .5 0 .5 .5 1 1.5 2.5 4 6.5 10.5 17 27.5

Sub series governed by Sn = 2 * Sn-1 + Sigma (i=2 to n) Sn-i

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

0 1 2 5 13 34 ...

Sub series governed by Sn = 3 * Sn-1 - Sn-2

where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

0 1 3 8 21 55 ...

Merged series governed by Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2 where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 ...... (Fibonacci series is a subset of iSeries)

The above equations hold true for any value of i, again confirming the singularity of i.

As per Antony Ryan's suggestion, a fellow author in this contest, I searched google to see how Fibonacci type series can be used to explain Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity and found an interesting article.

d-super.pdf"> The-Fibonacci-code-behind-superstring-theory](https://msel-naschie.com/pdf/The-Fibonacci-code-behin

d-super.pdf)

Now that I split the Fibonacci series in to two semi series, seems like each of the sub semi series corresponds to QM and GR and together they explain the Quantum Gravity. Seems like this duality is a commonality in nature once relativity takes effect or a series is kicked off. I can draw and analogy and say that this dual series with in the "iSeries" is like the double helix of our DNA. The only commonality between the two series is at the base seed 0 and first seed 1, which are the bits in our binary system.

I have put forth the absolute truth in the Theory of everything that universe is an "iSphere" and we humans are capable of perceiving the 4 dimensional 3Sphere aspect of the universe and described it with an equation of S=BM^2.

I have also conveyed the absolute mathematical truth of zero = I = infinity and proved the same using the newly found "iSeries" which is a super set of Fibonacci series.

All this started with a simple question, who am I?

I am drawn out of my self or singularity or i in to existence.

I super positioned my self or I to be me.

I am one of our kind, I is every one of all kinds.

I am Fibonacci series in iSeries

I am phi in zero = I = infinity

I am 3Sphere in iSphere

I am pi in zero = I = infinity

I am human and I is GOD (Generator Organizer Destroyer).

Love,

Sridattadev.

Dear Satya and All,

Enjoy the absolute truth of the self. Thou art that.

Love,

Sridattadev.